Where is the most family friendly area in London?

Transcription

1 Where is the most family friendly area in London? Jill Rutter A report by the Family and Childcare Trust on family friendly trends in London. Sponsored by

2 02 Introduction There are now over 1.1 million families with dependent children living in London. Most of them successfully raise their children, although some families struggle with parenting. Drawing on ideas about resilience, developed by those working with vulnerable families, children and parents need certain protective factors to enable them to withstand stress and to thrive (Rutter, 1985; Lexmond, 2011). These are attributes or resources that help families withstand stress and achieve good outcomes. Although inter-related, these factors can be grouped into a number of areas: 1. Personal and family attributes, such as parenting skills. 2. A decent income and opportunities for social mobility 3. Access to family friendly work 4. High quality public services, such as schools and healthcare 5. A family friendly infrastructure, for example, housing and transport. Cards are published at an important time. All the mainstream political parties went into the 2015 general election with significant pledges for families. A new government is the opportunity to turn these proposals into action. Since the election, the Government has announced many changes in policy that affect families, in particular, increasing funding for childcare and changes to tax credits. It is also a year since the Government announced that all new laws or policies from Westminster will be subject to the Family Test to make sure they support strong and stable families (Department for Work and Pensions, 2014). It is an important time to audit family policy. We hope that the local and national report cards are a useful tool for those who want to work to make this country more family friendly. We have attempted to measure these family friendly factors in this local report card. It examines trends towards becoming family friendly in London and accompanies our National Report Card for For our London report we have analysed 27 different sets of statistics that relate to wellbeing, income and poverty, employment, public services, housing and infrastructure. The analysis of the family friendly indicators was then collated and used to rank each local authority area, according to how family friendly we judged it to be. It is important to stress that we not just grading public services and local authorities. We have indicators that relate to education and healthcare, as the quality of these services has a big impact on family wellbeing and outcomes. But there are many other family friendly factors that largely lie outside the control of local authorities. These include indicators that relate to income and employment. The London report card, therefore, is about places and the people that live there, and is not a grading of local authorities. Generally deprived areas scored lower across a range of family friendly indicators, reflecting the challenges these areas face. But our analysis also highlighted a number of deprived areas that scored well on some indicators for example, schools in Barking and Dagenham have had some success in narrowing the achievement gap at GCSE between children on free school meals and their peers. Our 2015 London and National Family Report

3 03 Our methodology We wanted to find indicators that would enable us to measure which areas are doing best for families. These needed to robust enough to be broken down to local authority level. We searched for indicators that related protective factors (income, access to family friendly work, high quality public services and a family friendly infrastructure and living environment). We decided to use some indicators that gave a broader indication of family wellbeing. These wellbeing indicators included local life satisfaction data, recorded crime, the prevalence of breastfeeding and fluency in English. As we needed to analyse this data at a local authority level, the datasets we used needed to be large, in order for our analysis to be robust. The statistics we used were either derived from the Census, large national surveys or from administrative datasets, for example, the National Pupil Dataset. We were unable to rank the City of London or the Isles of Scilly, as data for those small local authorities was either unavailable or the figures were unreliable due to the small sample size. We found it hard to find local data that relate to family friendly work. The Workplace Employment Relations Survey and the Work-Life Balance Study are both small UK surveys with sample size that is too small to enable a local authority area breakdown of results. Instead, we have used indicators from the Census, Labour Force Survey and the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings as proxy measures of family friendly work, looking at pay differences between full and part-time workers, hours of work, Saturday and Sunday work and commuting times. There is also a lack of local data on parks, public Table One: family friendly indicators green space and the environment. As a consequence we only had one indicator on the environment on air pollution. Looking through the data, we also noticed that there is sometimes a long delay in making some surveys and administrative datasets accessible to researchers and the public. This makes it difficult to hold the Government to account on issues such as child poverty. We are also concerned to note that in some areas, important administrative data is no longer being collected or submitted by the public bodies concerned for example, breastfeeding statistics and homelessness statistics in some parts of London. The set of indicators that we used are given in Table One. For each family friendly indicator, we graded local authorities from 1 to 150 in England, with 150 being awarded to the local authority area that had the best results. For example, Richmond had the lowest level of childhood obesity in England and scored 150 in this area, whereas Southwark s results the lowest in London put them at 150 in the league table, giving them a score of 1. We then added up the scores for all 27 indicators to come up with an overall ranking. We have used data from our national ranking to produce a report card for London. As already noted, we are not grading local authorities and public services. Rather, we are looking at a geographic area and judging how family friendly it is. It is also an average for an area, and almost all local authorities include some deprived wards. Indicator Data source Broad family wellbeing statistics 1 Average (mean) life satisfaction rating Annual Population Survey, personal wellbeing dataset, April 2013 to March All recorded crime in 12 months to June 2014, per head of population 3 Percentage of babies totally or partially breastfed at the 6-8 week development check 4 Percentage of children who are overweight or obese in Year 6 of primary education 5 Adult participation in sport in reference week of Active People Survey 6 Percentage of the over-3 population who cannot speak English well or at all Police force recorded crime statistics (Home Office administrative data) NHS England statistical release Breastfeeding initiation and prevalence at 6 to 8 weeks, 2014 data, or most recent, if absent 13/14 data Public Health England, available from the National Child and Maternal Health Intelligence Network Department for Culture, Media and Sports Active People Survey 2012 Census 2011

4 04 7 Single parent households with dependent children, as a percentage of all households Income and poverty 8 Child poverty the percentage of children living in households receiving out-of-work benefits or on work tax credits where the household income is less than 60 per cent of median income 9 Gross median weekly pay, for all employee jobs by residency 10 Percentage of the population who are unemployed or economically inactive 11 Difference between Living Wage and gross hourly pay for the lowest paid 20% of employees (by residency) Family friendly work 12 Difference between gross hourly pay for female fulltime and female part-time workers 13 Percentage of local authority residents aged in employment who worked more than 49 hours per week in the week before Census Percentage of the population working Saturday and/or Sunday Census 2011 Department for Work and Pensions Households below average income data, 2013 Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, 2014 Labour Force Survey, year to March 2015 Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, 2014 Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, 2014 Census 2011 Labour Force Survey Average journey to work times in minutes Labour Force Survey, 2014, quarter four High quality public services 16 Percentage uptake of free early education among eligible two year olds 17 The percentage of boys achieving at least the expected levels in all 17 early learning goals at 4-5 years 18 Proportions of pupils eligible for free school meals who get 5 grade A*-C grades at GCSE (including English and maths) 19 Percentage of population with Level 4 qualifications Department for Education Provision for children under five statistics, January 2015 Department for Education Early Years Foundation Stage Profile attainment, 2013/14 Department for Education, GCSE attainment by pupil characteristics, 2013/14, National Pupil Dataset Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, year to March Conception rate per 1,000 females under 18 Conception statistics, England and Wales, Local authority revenue expenditure for cultural services per head Family friendly infrastructure 22 Number of children in households accepted as homeless and in temporary accommodation, per head of population 23 Percentage of families with dependent children who live in the private rental sector 24 Reported child casualties by local authority, England, , as a percentage of 0-18 population, 25 Percentage of families with dependent children who have no access to a car or van Department for Communities and Local Government revenue outturn workbooks, 2015/16. Includes district council expenditure Department for Communities and Local Government, Statutory Homeless Statistics, January March 2015 Census 2011 Department for Transport Reported road casualties annual report, 2013 Census Under Five childcare places per 100 children Department for Education Provision for children under five statistics, January Estimate of the percentage of deaths that had particulate air pollution as a contributory factor Public Health England

5 05 Overall ranking When it comes to family friendly indicators, London is a city of many contrasts. As Table Two indicates, in some areas London does well compared with other parts of England, for example, its work to narrow the gap at Table Two: London-wide performance for family friendly indicators GCSE between children eligible for free school meals and their peers. For other many other indicators, such as child poverty and housing, its city-side performance is below average. Indicator London performance compared with rest of England Life satisfaction Below average Police recorded crime Below average Breastfeeding at 6-8 weeks Above average Overweight and obese children Below average Adult participation in sport Below average English language fluency Below average Single parent households with dependent children Below average Child poverty Below average Median wages Above average Unemployment and economic inactivity Mixed, with some places above and some below average Pay for lowest income quintile Mixed, with some places above and some below average Pay difference between female full-time and parttime Mixed, with some places above and some below average jobs Working 49 or more hours per week Below average Working Saturday/Sunday Above average Journey to work time Below average Uptake of free early education for two year olds Below average Boys development at the end of nursery education Mixed, with some places above and some below average GCSE results for children eligible for free school meals Above average Adults with Level 4 qualifications Above average Teenage pregnancy Mixed, with some places above and some below average Cultural and leisure spend by local authorities Mixed, with some places above and some below average Homeless families Below average Families living in private rented housing Below average Child road casualties Mixed, with most London local authorities clustering in the middle of the league table Families with children without a car Below average Childcare places per 100 children Below average Particulate air pollution Below average

6 06 But there are many differences between and within individual local authority areas. Table Three gives the overall family friendly scores for each London local authority area. Richmond is the most family friendly place in London and is ranked 3 out of 150 England, followed by Bromley (32) and Kingston (38). What is surprising is that so many London local authorities do badly. Ten out of the bottom 20 local authorities are located in London, including those which cover comparatively prosperous suburbs such as Croydon and Hounslow. Barking and Dagenham is the lowest ranking London area at 149 out of 150. It gets low scores for lifestyle factors such as wellbeing, childhood obesity, exercise and teenage pregnancy. Unemployment and pay levels are among the worst in London. However, a high performing council has managed to improve children s outcomes and Barking and Dagenham Council has done particularly well to narrow the gap at GCSE between children on free school meals and their peers. It has also managed to achieve a high uptake of free early education among deprived two year olds, one of the best results in London. As can be seen, many of the local authority areas that achieve low scores have high levels of poverty. Barking and Dagenham, Newham and Tower Hamlets stand out in this respect. Such income deprivation is long-standing, but has been made worse by the proliferation of low waged jobs in recent years (Trust for London, 2015). Poverty places a great burden on families and communities, with overall levels of wellbeing tending to be lower in poor neighbourhoods. While the relationship between poverty and parenting skills is complex, poverty makes it much more difficult to be a good parent. Poor children are less likely to do well at school and progress to university. Nevertheless, there are deprived local authorities that have achieved higher scores in some areas, and high performing public services can make a difference to families lives. What is surprising is that so many London local authorities do badly. Ten out of the bottom 20 local authorities are located in London, including those which have comparatively prosperous suburbs such as Croydon and Hounslow. Table Three: Overall scores and rankings for London local authority areas Barking and Dagenham National ranking for England Score Comment Low scores for lifestyle factors such as wellbeing, childhood obesity, exercise and teenage pregnancy. Unemployment and pay levels are among the worst in London. However, a high performing council has managed to improve children s outcomes and Barking and Dagenham Council has done particularly well to narrow the gap at GCSE between children on free school meals and their peers. Barnet A prosperous local authority, although there are pockets of poverty in the south of the borough. The quality of family life may be adversely affected by public spending cuts, with Barnet having one of the lowest level of expenditure on cultural services of any local authority in Britain. Uptake of free early for deprived 2 year olds is also very low in Barnet, 20 percentage points below the national average. Bexley An outer-london local authority where parents spend long hours commuting to work. Health indicators such as wellbeing, exercise and childhood obesity are poor in this local authority. Brent 146= This local authority s family friendly indicators are mixed. Its schools have done well to narrow achievement gaps at GCSE between children on free school meals and their peers. However, there are large numbers of homeless families in the local authority, as well as families living in insecure and poor quality private rental accommodation. Brent also has high levels of childhood obesity.

7 07 Bromley This local prosperous authority does well in most family friendly indicators, although many adults spend long hours commuting to work. Child road casualties are high in this local authority. Camden Child poverty levels are high in this diverse local authority, where wealthy and poor families are often living in close proximity. Despite high levels of deprivation, its public services have achieved good outcomes in relation to reducing teenage pregnancy and narrowing the achievement gaps at GCSE between children on free school meals and their peers. The local authority needs to make sure that more deprived two year olds receive free early education; only 41 per cent of eligible children were receiving this help in Croydon Croydon gets a surprisingly low family friendly score, given that many parts of the local authority are comparatively prosperous. The local authority needs to make sure that more deprived two year olds receive free early education; only 38 per cent of eligible children were receiving this help in Ealing This local authority gets low scores for many family friendly indicators, in particular housing, with large numbers of homeless families and those living in insecure and poor quality private rental accommodation. Enfield This outer London local authority should be doing better. It scores above average in most educational indicators, but many of its health indicators are poor. Childhood obesity levels are particularly high in Enfield. Greenwich This outer London local authority should be doing better. It scores above average in most educational indicators, and has been successful in narrowing the gaps between boys and girls and between children on free school meals and their peers. However, childhood obesity levels are high in Greenwich and participation in sport is low. Hackney This diverse local authority is an area of contrasts. Its nurseries and schools have been very successful in reducing the educational gaps between boys and girls and between those eligible for free school meals and their peers. The adult population has a high proportion of people with high level qualifications. However, Hackney scores very badly on many other family friendly indicators such as life satisfaction, recorded crime, child poverty and childhood obesity. Hammersmith and Fulham This local authority scores better than many London local authorities. However, uptake of free early education among deprived two year olds is low. Hammersmith and Fulham also has large proportions of homeless families living in temporary accommodation. Haringey Despite high levels of child poverty, Haringey schools have done well to reduce the gaps in GCSE results between children on free school meals and their peers. In most other family friendly indicators, Haringey scores below average. There are also large proportions of homeless families living temporary accommodation Harrow This prosperous outer-london local authority should be scoring higher, given a highly qualified adult population and schools that have been successful in closing the gap in GCSE results between children eligible for free school meals and their peers. There are large proportions of families living in the private rental sector because house prices are high and there is a shortage of social housing.

8 08 Havering Havering is a local authority of educational contrasts. Its nurseries and schools have been successful in narrowing the achievement gaps between boys and girls and between children eligible for free school meals and their peers. However, many in its adult population lack higher level qualifications. Hillingdon Hillingdon scores average scores in many family friendly indicators. However, uptake of free early education among deprived two year olds is low and there is a large development gap at five years between boys and girls. Hounslow This outer-london local authority should be scoring better. In particular, family friendly indictors that relate to young children are low in Hounslow. The number of childcare places is low, compared to the number of children and childhood obesity levels are high. Islington Child poverty levels are high in this diverse local authority, where wealthy and poor families are often living in close proximity. Kensington and Chelsea This economically diverse local authority is an area of contrasts. It scores very well in many areas, particularly those that relate to schools and adult qualifications. However, homelessness is a major social problem in this local authority, which has one of the highest proportions of homeless families in temporary accommodation in the UK. Kingston This local authority scores well above average for most family friendly indicators. However, work-life balance is an issue for some households, with long commuter journeys and work outside normal office hours. Lambeth This diverse local authority is an area of contrasts. Its schools have been very successful in reducing the educational gaps between those eligible for free school meals and their peers. The adult population has a high proportion of people with high level qualifications. However, Lambeth scores very badly on many other family friendly indicators such as life satisfaction, recorded crime, child poverty, lone parenthood and childhood obesity. Lewisham This economically diverse local authority has been successful in closing some of the achievement gaps between boys and girls, and between those eligible for free school meals and their peers. However, Lewisham scores below average on family friendly indicators that relate to housing, childhood obesity and exercise. Merton This local authority scores above average on many family friendly indicators, although work-life balance is difficult, with many adults having long commuter journeys. This local authority needs to consider transport issues that relate to families. Newham Homelessness, unemployment and low pay are major social problems in this deprived local authority. Newhams s poverty results in its low scores in a wide range of family friendly indicators. However, the nurseries, schools and colleges in this local authority have been very successful in narrowing the educational achievement gaps between boys and girls and between children eligible for free school meals and their peers. Redbridge While Redbridge scores above average in many family friendly indicators, high proportions of families are living in temporary accommodation or in the private rental sector.

9 09 Richmond Richmond scores well above average for most family friendly indicators, although some adults struggle to balance work and home. Child road casualties are high in Richmond. Southwark This economically diverse local authority is an area of contrasts. Southwark has done well to reduce some of the achievement gaps between boys and girls and between children on free school meals and their peers. However, recorded crime, childhood obesity and child poverty are high. Sutton Sutton scores above average for most family friendly indicators, although many adults have long commutes to work. Tower Hamlets Tower Hamlets has been very successful in reducing the achievement gap between children on free school meals and their peers. However, this local authority area has a low score on many other family friendly indicators which include childhood obesity, uptake of free early education for deprived two year olds, homelessness and air pollution. Tower Hamlets has the highest rate of child poverty in the UK. Waltham Forest Waltham Forest gets a surprisingly low family friendly score, given that it is an outer London suburb that does well at schooling and adult qualification indicators. However, this local authority has high proportions of homeless families and those living in the private rental sector. Wandsworth Work-life balance indicators are lower than average in this generally prosperous local authority area. While Wandsworth s schools have managed to narrow the achievement gap between children on free school meals and their peers, the uptake of free early education among deprived two year olds is among the lowest in England. Westminster This local authority is an area of extreme economic and social contrasts. Child poverty levels are high, while median wages are among the highest in Britain. Westminster has the highest proportions of homeless families of any local authority in England, but its nurseries and schools have been very successful in reducing the achievement gaps between children eligible for free school meals and their peers. Teenage pregnancy rates are very low.

10 10 Individual indicators family and community wellbeing Life satisfaction The Office for National Statistics collects data on wellbeing, through its Annual Population Survey. This data looks at four conditions: life satisfaction, worthwhile, happiness and anxiety. We used the life satisfaction data, with the England scoring 7.49 in The highest scoring local authorities tended to be rural areas, for example, Rutland (7.83) and North Yorkshire (7.76) score highest, with urban areas getting a lower mark. There is a big research literature that links lower levels of life satisfaction with urban living, attributing low scores to factors such as fear of crime and higher levels of poverty. With an average score of 7.37 London local authorities tend to be lower on life satisfaction. In England four of the bottom ten local authorities for this indicator were located in London. Kensington and Chelsea 7.70 (ranked 9 in Southwark 7.56 (ranked 42 in Merton 7.52 (ranked 54 in Hackney 7.13 (ranked 147 in Lambeth 6.99 (ranked 149 in Barking and Dagenham 6.93 (ranked 150 in. Recorded crime per head of population Being a victim of a crime is usually a distressing experience. Fear of crime also impacts on family wellbeing. We felt it was important to include this as an indicator of family and community wellbeing. The indicator we used was police recorded crime in the 12 months to June 2014, per person. Generally, urban areas that receive large numbers of tourists had the highest levels of police recorded crime, mostly due to high theft levels. It was, therefore, not surprising that many London local authorities had high levels of recorded crime. Barnet 6.06 (ranked 75 in Havering 6.10 (ranked 76 in Bromley 6.12 (ranked 78 in Kensington and Chelsea (ranked 148 in Camden (ranked 149 in Westminster (ranked 150 in. Breastfeeding While the use of formula milk is not indicative of bad parenting, there are many advantages of breastfeeding. It is free and protects a baby against infections and diseases. It also provides health benefits for mothers, including reducing the chances of breast cancer. For these reasons, the Government requires that midwifery and health visiting services help mothers to do this. Breastfeeding could thus be seen as an indicator of how well our health service is doing for families. It is an indicator of family wellbeing, as mothers who are stressed or receive little support from their partner, family or friends often find it more difficult to breastfeed. In England, all women who initiate breastfeeding in hospital are counted in statistics, then data is collected again at the 6-8 week development review undertaken by a health visitor. However, in some areas these statistics are not being collected. The most recent national data for England ( ) indicated that 47.2 per cent of babies were partially or exclusively breastfed the time of the 6-8 week review, although there are big differences between local authorities. Older mothers, the better educated, those from higher income groups and some ethnic minority groups are most likely to breastfeed. Higher proportions of highly educated mothers and those from minority ethnic groups account for the high prevalence of breastfeeding in London, which is the region with the highest breastfeeding rates in the UK. Kensington and Chelsea 86.5 per cent of babies partially or exclusively breastfed at 6-8 weeks (ranked 1 in Hackney 83.6 per cent (ranked 2 in Southwark 80.6 per cent (ranked 3 in Barking and Dagenham 54.5 per cent of babies partially or exclusively breastfed at 6-8 weeks (ranked 47 in Bexley 48.4 per cent (ranked 68 in Havering 42.4 per cent (ranked 94 in.

11 11 Childhood obesity Growing levels of obesity are one of the greatest challenges facing the NHS, with excess weight a contributory factor in cardio-vascular disease, type 2 diabetes and some types of cancer. This condition often starts in childhood, with overweight children more likely to become overweight or obese adults. In most cases childhood obesity is caused by the poor diet, over-eating and a lack of exercise. It is a growing trend, in , some 31.8 per cent of reception class children in England were obese or overweight, compared with 23.8 per cent in By the time children reach year six of primary school obesity rates have increased and tend to be highest in London, where seven of England s bottom ten local authorities are located in the capital. Richmond 24.3 per cent of year 6 children overweight or obese (ranked 1 in Kingston 28.4 per cent (ranked 8 in Bromley 29.9 per cent (ranked 21 in Barking and Dagenham 42.2 per cent year 6 children overweight or obese (ranked 148 in Tower Hamlets 42.3 per cent (ranked 149 in Southwark 43.8 per cent (ranked 150 in. Adult participation in sport Regular exercise improves physical and mental health, whereas physical inactivity predisposes us to obesity. Children with physically active parents are also more likely to participate in sport themselves. Some 35.2 per cent of the adult population played sport or engaged in active exercise for at least 30 minutes in the week before the last Active People Survey, but there are large differences in participation in sport and exercise between local authority areas. Although some London local authority areas score well, these are mostly central London local authorities with a large student population. Without students, London tends to score well below average in relation to adult participation in sport, with five of England s bottom ten local authorities are located in the capital. Richmond 29.8 per cent of the adult population played sport or engaged in active exercise for at least 30 minutes in the week before the 2012 Active People Survey (ranked 2 in Hammersmith and Fulham 26.9 per cent (ranked 5 in Westminster 26.7 per cent (ranked 7 in Newham 15.8 per cent of the adult population played sport or engaged in active exercise for at least 30 minutes in the week before the 2012 Active People Survey (ranked 147 in Enfield 15.7 per cent (ranked 148 in Barking and Dagenham 14.4 per cent (ranked 149 in Proficiency in English As a consequence of international migration, England is a more diverse country. Fluency in English promotes migrants integration, enabling them to find work and interact with those from outside their family or linguistic group. While the majority of new migrants and longersettled minority ethnic groups speak and read English well or fluently, there some groups who struggle to communicate, including disproportionate numbers of mothers, refugees and EU migrants. Census 2011 data suggests that 1.7 per cent of the population aged over three do not speak English well or at all. As might be expected, a lack of fluency in English is correlated with levels of recent migration, so it is not surprising that London (at 4.1 per cent of all those aged over three) has the highest proportion of people who do not speak English well or at all. This amounted to 320,000 people at the time of the 2011 census. Havering 0.71 per cent of the population aged over 3 do not speak English well or at all (ranked 57 in Bromley 0.75 per cent (ranked 59 in Richmond 1.03 per cent (ranked 71 in Brent 7.97 per cent of the population aged over 3 do not speak English well or at all (ranked 148= in Tower Hamlets 7.97 per cent (ranked 148= in Newham 8.72 per cent (ranked 150 in.

12 12 Single parents with dependent children as a percentage of all households Bringing up children is easier and less stressful where both parents are actively involved, and for this reason family stability is desirable. Auditing new laws and policies against their impact on family stability and relationship breakdown are component of the Government s new Family Test. The majority (64 per cent) of single parents now work in the UK, but the children of single parents are more likely to live in poverty than those living with two parents. An acrimonious breakdown of parents relationship can also have a negative impact on children s wellbeing. The proportion of single parent households has remained constant for nearly 20 years, comprising about 7 per cent of all households in Census However, there are differences in the proportions of households headed by single parents between different areas, with London families disproportionately headed by single parents. Kensington and Chelsea 4.86 per cent of households are single parent households with dependent children (ranked 5= in Richmond 4.86 per cent (ranked 5= in Kingston (5.58 per cent (ranked 19 in Croydon per cent of households are single parent households with dependent children (ranked 147 in Enfield per cent (ranked 148 in Barking and Dagenham per cent (ranked 150 in.

13 13 Individual indicators - income and poverty Although loving and warm relationships are found in families from all social classes, poverty can put pressure on families, by increasing parental stress and through the restrictions that a low income places on purchasing power and social activities. Research shows that it is harder to be a good parent on a low income, so earnings and action to alleviate poverty and inequality are important interventions to make the UK more family friendly (Lexmond et al, 2011). Poverty is also strongly associated with poor educational and health outcomes. Financial pressures can also contribute to the breakdown of relationships. Families have experienced close to a decade of stagnating living standards as wages have stalled while their expenditure on key items such as housing and childcare has increased. Tax and benefit changes implemented since 2010 have also reduced the income of most families with children 1. The overall proportion of children living in families whose income falls below the relative poverty line (60 per cent of median income) has remained stable at 17 per cent 2, mostly due to a fall in workless households. But the proportion of families with working parents in poverty has increase significantly. For example, in 2013/14, 35 per cent of children in families where one parent works full-time were living in poverty compared to 27 per cent in 2009/10 (Belfield et al, 2015). The Government has extended free school meals to all 5-7 year olds in England and will give parents greater help with their childcare costs from 2016, through increases in childcare help through Universal Credit, the new Tax Free Childcare scheme and increasing the hours of free early education. Despite these interventions, the future outlook for living standards for families is poor. This is because housing costs continue to increase and the Government proposes to significantly reduce financial support for parents both in and out of work. We have chosen four measures of income and poverty as indicators of family friendly. These are child poverty, unemployment and economic inactivity in the working age population, gross median weekly wages and average wages in the lowest paid 20 per cent of the population. Child poverty This measure sets of the percentage of children living in households receiving out-of-work benefits or working tax credits where the household income is less than 60 per cent of median income 3. It is a measure of relative poverty, in that it is a standard that defines how an individual is doing relative to the rest of society. Across the UK, 15.9 per cent of children were living in poverty in In London, however, 23 per cent of children are living in poverty, using the 60 per cent of median income measure. The high costs of childcare and a growth in low paid jobs are two factors that contribute to high levels of child poverty in London, where the majority of poor children are living in households where at least one adult is working. Richmond 8.8 per cent of children living in poverty (ranked 4 in Kingston 12.1 per cent (ranked 22 in Sutton 14.7 per cent (ranked 39 in Westminster 31.3 per cent of children living in poverty (ranked 145 in Islington 34.5 per cent (ranked 149 in Tower Hamlets 39.0 per cent (ranked 150 in. Median pay Gross median weekly wages are another relative poverty measure. It is the mid-point on the salary range, with 50 per cent of jobs paying less and 50 per cent paying more. In areas where a high proportion of jobs are low paid, gross median weekly pay is lower. Generally this figure is highest in London and the South East, although living costs are also higher in these two regions. Wandsworth per week (ranked 1 in Westminster per week (ranked 2 in Richmond 655 per week (ranked 3 in Waltham Forest per week (ranked 52= in Barking and Dagenham per week (ranked 65 in Newham per week (ranked 74 in. 1 Department for Work and Pensions Households below average income: 1994/1995 to 2013/2014 tables. 2 Ibid 3

14 14 Unemployment and economic inactivity An unemployed person is defined as someone without a job who is looking for work, while the economically inactive are those who are not looking for a job usually because they are studying, sick, disabled or have caring responsibilities. We took unemployment and economic inactivity in the (working age) population as another of our indicators, as workless families are much more likely to live in poverty. In the year to March 2015, 27.4 per cent of the working age population was unemployed or economically inactive in England (5.4 per cent unemployed and 22 per economically inactive). Overall, the rates of unemployment (6.2 per cent) and economic inactivity (22.9 per cent) are higher in London, compared to the average for England, a factor that contributes to high poverty levels in the capital. However, there are big differences in the employment rate in different parts if London. The City of Westminster, an area with one of the highest levels of median wages, has one of the lowest rates of employment in England. Lambeth 21.7 per cent of the working age population unemployed or economically inactive (ranked 13 in Wandsworth 21.8 per cent) (ranked 14 in Richmond 23.3 per cent (ranked 27 in Barking and Dagenham 36.9 per cent of the working age population unemployed or economically inactive (ranked 132 in Westminster 37.3 per cent (ranked 133 in Newham 40.6 per cent (ranked 144 in. Gross hourly pay for those on in the lowest income quintile compared with the Living Wage A number of community organisations supported by research argue that the current National Minimum Wage is not enough to cover the basic cost of living, and have campaigned for a Living Wage that pays enough for households to have a minimum acceptable standard of living. The UK and London Living wage is an hourly rate that is updated annually. The current UK Living Wage is 7.85 an hour, and 9.15 in London. Some 18 per cent of jobs in London were paid below the London Living Wage in 2014, although there are differences in this proportion between different local authorities. There has been a proliferation of low paid jobs in recent years in London, which has resulted in a change to London s poverty profile. Today most poor families in London are those where at least one adult is in work. We looked gross hourly pay for the bottom 20 per cent (quintile) of employees, and calculated the difference between this and the UK or London Living Wage. Local authority areas in London and the South East generally did best, with the average pay for the bottom quintile more than the London Living Wage. But the lowest three scoring local authority areas are also in London, showing that low pay is also prevalent in the capital, where the cost of living is highest. Kensington and Chelsea - median wages for bottom 20 per cent of residents 1.48 more than the London Living Wage (ranked 1 in Wandsworth - median wages for bottom 20 per cent of residents 1.27 more than the London Living Wage (ranked 2 in Richmond - median wages for bottom 20 per cent of residents 1.19 more than the London Living Wage (ranked 3 in Low scores Barking and Dagenham - median wages for bottom 20 per cent of residents 1.38 less than the London Living Wage (ranked 148 in Brent - median wages for bottom 20 per cent of residents 1.43 less than the London Living Wage (ranked 149 in Newham - median wages for bottom 20 per cent of residents 1.84 less than the London Living Wage (ranked 150 in.

15 15 Individual indicators access to family friendly work Almost all research about parental employment highlights the importance of flexible work opportunities in helping parents balance family life and work. Children may also benefit, as emerging evidence suggests flexible work arrangements have a positive impact on children s learning, as working parents can spend more time with their children. Since 2002 parents have also had the right to ask for flexible working, a right which has now been extended to all workers. Despite this development, a minority of employees have access to flexible work opportunities which are usually taken to include part-time working, flexi-time, term-time working, job shares, temporary reduced hours, annualised hours, compressed hours and opportunities to regularly work from home. Data from the 2011 Workplace Employment Relations Survey showed that only a third (34 per cent) of workplaces allowed flexi-time working, where staff could vary their time at work outside core hours. Part-time work was the most frequent flexible work option, with 56 per cent of workplaces offering this in But in many organisations part-time jobs are often of a lower status than full-time employment and are less likely to lead to promotion. There are also some groups of workers who have less access to flexible work practices. These include those who work in male-dominated workplaces or who have the fewest skills and qualifications, therefore the least bargaining power. But family friendly work is about more than flexible work opportunities, and there are many other work practices that impact on the quality of family life. There is a culture of long hours, with workers in the UK working longer than their peers in most EU countries and commuting time can also eat into family time. As already noted, low pay can have many impacts on the quality of family life by increasing parental stress and forcing families to go without essential items (Davis et al, 2014; Lexmond et al, 2011). Parents on low incomes may also take on overtime work or a second job in order to increase their wages, which in turn further impacts on the quality of family life. As already noted, there is a limited amount of local data that relates to family friendly work. We have used indicators from the Census, Labour Force Survey and the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings as proxy measures of family friendly work, looking at pay differences between full and part-time workers, hours of work, Saturday and Sunday work and commuting times. Difference in pay levels between female full-time and female parttime work Part-time employment is strategy that parents disproportionally mothers - adopt to keep down their childcare costs and help balance work with family life. But in many organisations part-time jobs are often of a lower status than full-time employment and are less likely to lead to promotion (Grant et al, 2005). As a consequence, part-time jobs also tend to be less well paid, when compared pro rata, with full-time employment. In research by the Timewise Foundation (2013) just 3 per cent of part-time jobs advertised in March 2012 paid a salary of more than 20,000 per year full-time equivalent. We took the difference in median gross hourly between female full-time and female part-time employment as an indicator of family friendly employment. In 2014, the median gross hourly pay for full-time female worker was in England, but for a part-time female worker it was 8.46, a difference of 3.91 per hour. At a local authority area level, where part-time jobs enjoy greater parity, this figure will be lower, although this may be due to a general prevalence of low-paid jobs. Generally, the areas with the biggest gaps are those where local residents include many women who are very well-paid, but also others who are at the lower end of the income spectrum Newham pay difference per hour between female full-time and part-time work (ranked 1 in Barking and Dagenham 0.58 pay difference per hour (ranked 3 in Tower Hamlets 1.55 pay difference per hour (ranked 19 in scores Merton 6.81 pay difference per hour (ranked 148 in Wandsworth 7.52 pay difference per hour (ranked 149 in Kensington and Chelsea 8.26 pay difference per hour (ranked 150 in.

16 16 Working 49 or more hours per week Although there are some exceptions for some groups such as the self-employed, regulations are meant to prevent employees from spending more than 48 hours per week at work. Despite this, there is a still a culture of long working hours in the UK, which can have a negative impact on family life and the time that children spend with their parents. Census 2011 data indicated that 13.3 per cent of employed year olds worked 49 or more hours per week (10.2 per cent males and 3.1 per cent females). Generally, those living in prosperous parts of London worked the longest hours, with eight of the bottom ten local authorities located in London. The areas where fewest workers worked 49 or more hours per week were largely deprived areas, suggesting a trade-off between a higher income and family friendly work. Waltham Forest 10.9 per cent of workforce working 49 or more hours per week (ranked 45 in Croydon 11.7 per cent (ranked 66 in Enfield 11.8 per cent (ranked 68 in Hammersmith and Fulham 23.3 per cent of workforce working 49 or more hours per week (ranked 148 in Westminster 31.2 per cent (ranked 149 in Kensington and Chelsea 35.1 per cent (ranked 150 in. Working Saturday and Sunday Although weekend work is essential in some sectors of the economy health and social care, for example working outside normal office hours has the potential to impact on family life. Parents may also find it difficult to find formal childcare if they need it. Nationally, Labour Force Survey data suggests that nearly 3 million people are required as part of their usual working pattern to work Saturday, about 10 per cent of the workforce. Over 2 million people work on Sunday. The prevalence of Saturday and Sunday work is usually determined by the local labour market and the range of jobs available. The large number of jobs in financial services which usually do not require weekend work - means that a smaller proportion of Londoners have to work at the weekend, compared to most other regions of the UK. Hammersmith and Fulham 4.2 per cent of the workingage (16-64) population usually work Saturday and/or Sunday (ranked 5 in Wandsworth 6.1 per cent (ranked 11 in Enfield 6.2 per cent (ranked 12 in Kingston 15.2 per cent of the working-age (16-64) population usually work Saturday and/or Sunday (ranked 105 in Lewisham 15.6 per cent (ranked 112 in Havering 15.7 per cent (ranked 114 in. Average journey to work times in minutes Long journeys to work can eat into the time that parents spend with their children. Parents who spend long hours commuting to work may also need childcare early in the morning in or in the early evening. Generally, those living in London and the South East spent a longer time travelling to work. The average home to work journey time in England was 29 minutes in 2014, but in London it was 38 minutes. The bottom 18 local authorities for commuting times are all located in London. Kensington and Chelsea 28 minutes home to work journey time (ranked 84= in Hillingdon 29 minutes (ranked 94= in Islington 30 minutes (ranked 100= in Redbridge 46 minutes home to work journey time (ranked 147= in Wandsworth 46 minutes (ranked 147= in Bexley 48 minutes (ranked 149 in Bromley 49 minutes (ranked 150 in.

17 17 Individual indicators high quality public services High quality public services make a major difference to family life. We had included seven indicators that related to the quality of public services Uptake of free early education among deprived two year olds In September 2014 the 40 per cent most income deprived two year olds became entitled to part-time free early education in England, amounting to 570 hours per year and most usually delivered by schools, pre-schools and day nurseries. This provision is meant to narrow the development gap between the most disadvantaged children and their peers. But take-up of free early education among deprived two year olds has been low in some areas, sometimes because there are not enough places, but also because parents do not want this help. By January 2015 just 58 per cent of children were receiving this provision in England, but in London only 46 per cent of eligible children were doing so. Nine of the ten bottom scoring local authorities are located in London. Overall, some 26,500 of London s most disadvantaged two year olds are missing out on early education. Richmond 85 per cent of eligible two years olds receiving free early education (ranked 1 in Kingston 71 per cent (ranked 18= in Redbridge 66 per cent (ranked 46= in Wandsworth 33 per cent of eligible two years olds receiving free early education (ranked 148 in Newham 31 per cent (ranked 149 in Tower Hamlets 26 per cent (ranked 150 in. Difference in development between boys and girls at five years Through early education and schooling there are gaps in children s outcomes between different groups of children. The development gap between deprived children and their peers is marked, and there are also differences in outcomes between different ethnic groups. There are also differences in outcomes between boys and girls, with the latter doing better in all stages of schooling. In the Early years Foundation Stage profile assessment, 67 per cent of girls, but just 50 per cent of boys achieved the expected level of development in all 17 early learning goals (ELGs), a 17 percentage point difference. However, some nurseries have managed to narrow these development gaps, and have made sure that that boys do well in early education. London does a little better than average in this respect, with four of the ten best performing local authorities for boys achievement located in London. However, there are also a number of low scoring local authorities in London. Lewisham 70 per cent of boys achieving expected level of development in all ELGs (ranked 1 in Bexley 65 per cent (ranked 2 in Greenwich 64 per cent (ranked 3 in Tower Hamlets 43 per cent of boys achieving expected level of development in all ELGs (ranked 123= in Camden 42 per cent (ranked 130= in Hillingdon 41 per cent (ranked 135= in. GCSE results for children on free school meals Children s test and examination results have continued to improve, but in all parts of the UK there are still large gaps in achievement between the most disadvantaged children and their peers. In England, for example, just 41.8 per cent of students entitled to free school meal obtained 5A*-C grades (including English and maths) at GCSE in 2014, compared with 69.8 per cent of all other children. However, London students who are eligible for free school meals do much better than children elsewhere in England, with19 out of the top 20 local authorities located in London. Kensington and Chelsea 71.1 of children eligible for free school meals obtained 5A*-C grades (including English and maths) at GCSE (ranked 1 in. Westminster 70.8 per cent (ranked 2 in Tower Hamlets 65.6 per cent (ranked 3 in Havering 44.9.per cent of children eligible for free school meals obtained 5A*-C grades (including English and maths) at GCSE (ranked 41 in Lewisham 44.1 per cent (ranked 44 in Bexley 39.2 per cent (ranked 68 in.